The Book of Project Self SPELL

[Dysole]

The Book of Project Self: Sorcery
Magic: Arena of the Planeswalkers master set

Sorcery
Move a blue Planeswalker you control to an empty space that's adjacent to another figure you control.

-Rulings and Clarifications-

• - TBA

-Combinations and Synergies-

• - TBA

Synergy Benefits Received

• - TBA

Synergy Benefits Offered

• - TBA

-Strategy, Tactics and Tips-

• - TBA

Unit Strategy Review

• - TBA

[HeroTempest]

Does the planeswalker suffer disengage by being moved? I think so, but this spell raised this question on my last game

[TREX]

Originally Posted by HeroTempest

Does the planeswalker suffer disengage by being moved? I think so, but this spell raised this question on my last game

That's weird that it doesn't say whether or not. One would assume since you are using a card to do the move that you would not take a LEA, but it clearly doesn't say. Which would make me say you would take one. Ideas anybody? I'm curious now.

[Marro_Warlord]

Originally Posted by TREX

That's weird that it doesn't say whether or not. One would assume since you are using a card to do the move that you would not take a LEA, but it clearly doesn't say. Which would make me say you would take one. Ideas anybody? I'm curious now.

Flavor-wise, I'd say no. Your Planeswalker is creating an illusion of himself, and was never in the specified location. So technically, your guy was never there, and a fake version of himself was the one there. Therefore, no leaving engagement attack because he didn't exist.

Rule Lawyer-wise, you would. If your person moves at all ---> Leaving engagement attack. This would trigger a leaving engagement attack if the need arose. Since your figure would be moved, (and not even "placed"), he would definitely provoke a leaving engagement attack.

Alternate Interpretation: In the beginning, they never mentioned the "When Taelord starts to fly he will take any leaving engagement attacks," on Taelord. The same could be true here, which means that: He won't take leaving engagement attacks from moving this way.

I could see this playing out in any way.

[Kajoq]

Originally Posted by Marro_Warlord

Rule Lawyer-wise, you would. If your person moves at all ---> Leaving engagement attack. This would trigger a leaving engagement attack if the need arose. Since your figure would be moved, (and not even "placed"), he would definitely provoke a leaving engagement attack.

By this logic, since you're 'Moving' wouldn't you also have to find a path and take any leaving engagement attacks along the way? I believe the -intended- use of this card would not generate any leaving engagement attacks, but they didn't do a good job on it. It's really frustrating they were so loose with the wording on these cards since MTG they're so consistent about the templating.

[Cavalier]

Originally Posted by Kajoq

By this logic, since you're 'Moving' wouldn't you also have to find a path and take any leaving engagement attacks along the way? I believe the -intended- use of this card would not generate any leaving engagement attacks, but they didn't do a good job on it. It's really frustrating they were so loose with the wording on these cards since MTG they're so consistent about the templating.

No. There are many ways of being moved (teleport, carry, etc.) that could have a leaving engagement attack associated but that would not require you to indicate the path traveled.

[HeroTempest]

Probably we gonna play without taking disengage damage.
I guess it's a bit OP be able to move anywhere without being attacked for a 5 points card.
However, taking disengage on the path you are moving the pw or even create a path to move doesn't make much sense at all.
I think it should be like the flying ability: you take disengage when leaving and then go straight where you want to. But the spell text doesn't mention anything about that.

[Targanth]

I have considered the 'move' for this card to be like a teleport (or flying). Since it says nothing about engagement, I would expect normal engagement rules to apply - the Blue Planeswalker would be exposed to take leaving engagement attack from any enemy figures adjacent to the original position.

[Tornado]

Is it a move or a teleport. If it is a move, is it based on the Move # of the casting PW?

This is an important ruling that would also apply to Pass Through Stone.

It reads like a Teleport but I wish it said place instead of move if it is a Teleport or said 'move up to....spaces' if it is a move.

[lefton4ya]

I had the same question in a game today. I went with a teleport so ignores move, but I was wondering if the planeswalker is engaged and you use Project Self, does an opponent roll for disengament? I do not think the wording of AotP cards were put through enough scrutiny when compared to Heroscape, when it should be the opposite because they benefit from years of questing wording of both Heroscape and Magic the Gathering cards should mean the designers have more help in wording.

[Colorcrayons]

I look at it this way:

It doesn't specifically state that the Planeswalker is exempt from the general rule of leaving engagement attacks (specific overides the general), so it would take a leaving engagement attack if it was adjacent to an enemy figure before being transported/moved/teleported/whatever.

Its also a 5 point spell. One shouldn't expect too much for that price.
Personally, I vote for balance reasons alone associated with the cost that it take LEA.

Its already incredibly powerful, able to move the PW to the otherside of the board potentially. There has to be a drawback to that power, especially for that price.

Its worth the risk of the 50% chance of a wound.

[Tornado]

I do not want a LEA ruling. I know you take LEAs because it does not say that you do not.

I want a 'move X # of spaces' or is it a 'teleport/place power that has no limits in distance'?

Also the 5 point basis is pointless as there are powerful low point spells and spells not worth their cost(IMO). The card that destroys 2 of your opponent's Spell cards is a 5 pointer and it is worth way more than that.

There is a spell like it that moves a creature you control and that one specifically states that you do not take LEAs so you do not, that is clear.

What is not clear is if this is a 'move' or 'place' power?